|
The point about what is in the right spirit is important to discuss, however,
there's also a lot wrong in this article. The thing that bugs me the
most is misrepresenting FSF. 1. Attributes this https://fsfe.org/news/2019/news-20190326-01.en.html
to the fsf. That is not the fsf, but the fsfe, which is independent from
fsf. 2. I don't think that fsfe press release "supports expanding
copyright". 3. "The FSF didn’t move to GitHub because GitHub is proprietary, and
they see that as inconsistent with their values." Thats not correct. For
starters, see https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria.en.html 4. "If a company were to add a proprietary feature to an open source
project, yet pays five employees to develop the open source part
further, the FSF sees this as a tragedy." Wrong. First, FSF accepts
donations from proprietary software companies, so it's participating in
in a tragedy? FSF does not say things like: "The FSF believe because
your born, you're going to use nonfree software, which is bad, so being
born is a tragedy." 5. Look at what fsf and osi say about "open source" vs "free software"
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point....,
https://opensource.org/faq, and neither say that permissive or copyleft
being any part of the of it, so its definitely not the main thing
like the article describes. |